Re: RFA: >, >>, and "tee" operators

[Fernando Nasser <fnasser@redhat.com>]

Daniel Jacobowitz wrote:
> 
> GDB's option identifier varies, actually; symbol-file -readnow,
> add-symbol-file -s <section> <address> are the only two I see offhand.
> We only use / for print format characters.  Mostly we just drop them
> all on one line.
> 

That went in by mistake (it was before my time anyway).  Not that I have
anything against it (see below).

> Well, I don't have a problem with reserving / for FMT sequences
> (anything that modifies how output is printed) and - for options
> (anything that modifies what gets done).  I think '/' is only used for
> format sequences right now; at least I don't see anything otherwise in
> the manual besides display, print, and x.  Heck, I actually think
> separating format specifiers and options this way is intuitive.

That was exactly my argument years ago.  But I lost it (well, actually
the discussion went on and on for weeks without anyone reaching an
agreement and I gave up on the idea).


I don't see much problem in using the set commands (and thus avoinding
this issue).  It also has its advantages like a show comand.
Besides, set/show commands are there for things that alter GDB's 
behavior -- in the case, where output is sent.


What is the current option being defended?


-- 
Fernando Nasser
Red Hat Canada Ltd.                     E-Mail:  fnasser@redhat.com
2323 Yonge Street, Suite #300
Toronto, Ontario   M4P 2C9